I understand completely. The judgement call cannot be reviewed and the play will stand. So what we should be contacting the NFL with is that THEY should be reviewing the judgements of the refs.
Sure, guys running down a sideline always end up 4 feet out of bounds. It's the 1st Rule Of Physics. Happens to me all the time....I walk straight down the street on the right side and then, all of a sudden, I end up on the left-side. Come on.......Baker was 2 feet inside.
They need to go away from calling it a "judgement call" because all a judgement is is one's opinion! I know the shit's not reviewable but don't call it a judgement call. Like I said before it was in the officals judgement or opinion that the returner didn't touch the ball on the punt and the play was reviwed and only varified his judgement. The bottom line is the officals blew it. I know we played like shit and didn't deserve to win but to fight back and lose on a call like that is BS.
Royal, I understand 'judgement' -- do you understand 100% wrong??? The 'judgement' here was that Baker, running DOWN the sideline, was going across the end zone. That is clearly WRONG. The refs blew the call and they blew about 5 others during the game. They made 3 errors on the Baker TD catch.
I agree it was a BS call, I'm pissed about it. I'm just saying that in general, that's the logic behind a "judgment" call, and why it isn't reviewable. The ref just used horrible judgment.
Of course they got it wrong, that's not the issue. The fact is they can't review a force out play to determine if they think he would have come in bounds, no matter how much we wish they could. It's the rule. Damn, I can't believe how dense some of the people here are.
We understand the rules...we also know that the refs blew the call and if there was that much at stake, they could have asked upstairs. I don't believe that at that point in the game, with that much at stake, that the rule is iron-clad. Using pinetar above 17" was clearly illegal in 1983 when George Brett hit his homerun, but the league said disallowing the HR was 'a violation of the spirit of the rule." Brett clearly violated the rule. The AL President overruled the umps. The refs in the Jets game should have huddled, come to the right conclusion, or called upstairs. I don't care if there is a rule about challenging a judgement call when the 'judgement' was 100% bull**** and the ref's 'judgement' was like he borrowed my 93-year old grandmother's eyesite with macular degeneration.
The real issue is that the referee that got it wrong won't face any consequences. And that's disgusting. He should never get work in the NFL again.
That was total BS. I hate situations that arent "reviewable." What is instant review for then, if you can't challenge inside 2 minutes and you can't review game changing plays? The NFL needs to fix the review system more.
here's my e-mail....... In yesterday's Jets/Browns game, Chris Baker (New York Jets receiver) caught a potentially tying touchdown pass with under a minute to play on a 4th & 4 play- he caught the ball, and then was slammed out of bounds by several feet. He CLEARLY would have come down inbounds (because he was 2-3 ft from the sideline & running straight) one official called it out, he had a poor view from out-of-bounds, yet another official with a better vantage point seemed to call it a catch..... this was a critical last-second 4th quarter, the officials should have made sure to get the call "RIGHT", I understand that the rules call this a judgment play, but the video evidence clearly shows Baker in-bounds (by several feet) w/ possession and about to land his feet to the ground...before being violently shoved out-of-bounds....I don't believe the intent of your rule is to get the play wrong, I like instant replay because it attempts to make the "RIGHT" call on critical plays....something has to be done about this, because the integrity of the league is at stake....I'm very upset to devote 3+ hours of my Sunday to this game and walk away feeling disgusted with the finale....I've attached a photo of the catch and it is obvious that the reciever was in-bounds by 2-3 feet...the league needs to address..... .....The Jets and their fans deserve an apology, as well as the rules committee needs to re-examine the rule and this play..... Sincerely,
The refs huddled and decided he wouldn't have come down in bounds, that makes it a horrible call. BUT THEY WEREN'T ALLOWED TO CALL UPSTAIRS, NOT MATTER HOW IMPORTANT IT WAS OR HOW MUCH WE WANTED THEM TO. IT SUCKS, BUT THAT'S THE RULE. My god, a chimp could understand this concept.
How can a 'judgement call' be non-reviewable. If anything it's these types of calles that NEED to be reviewed. They need to change this rule
What about protesting the spot of the ball or if the catch was actually made? That is an error. Right?
Correct. It really is just a loophole that the refs made a stipulation when Instant Replay came back, I remember reading it in an article that was specific about that.
On that play, you can actually review whether or not possession was maintained throughout the process of the forceout. But that was never in doubt, and was never at the center of the debate of that play.
Just because it was not a reviewable play does not take away from the idiocy of the call because of how wrong it was.
What exactly is this going to do? It won't turn an L to a W that's for sure. There's no point really...
